CNN host Rick Sanchez let slip a telling admission in response to the deadly bombings in Uganda during his show yesterday, the fact that such attacks are “helpful” for the military-industrial complex agenda to take over and occupy third world countries under AFRICOM, the United States African Command.

Speaking with a former CIA agent, Sanchez stated, “You know what’s interesting about this, in a strange way the event is helpful to the cause of those of us who know how sadistic these fundamental radical Islamic terrorists are and if it helps get the message out there that these are not the good guys then so be it”.

Watch the clip.

Sanchez is brazenly admitting that deadly terror attacks like the bombings in Uganda only aid the military-industrial complex agenda to take over and occupy third world countries. Given the fact that such attacks help the geopolitical agenda of the powers that control the United States, who has the strongest motivation to carry out the attacks?

We heard similar rhetoric back in 2008 when shocking excerpts of confidential recordings released under the Freedom of Information Act featured former Defense Secretary Donald Rumsfeld talking with top military analysts about how a flagging Neo-Con political agenda could be successfully restored with the aid of another terrorist attack on America.

The tapes were released as part of the investigation into the Pentagon’s “message force multipliers” program in which top military analysts were hired to propagandize for the Iraq war in the corporate media.

In the audio recording, Lt. Gen. Michael DeLong bemoans shrinking political support for Neo-Con war plans on Capitol Hill and suggests that sympathy for the military-industrial complex agenda will only be achieved after a new terror attack.

Rumsfeld agrees that the psychological impact of 9/11 is wearing off and the “behavior pattern” of citizens in both the U.S. and Europe suggests that they are unconcerned about the threat of terror.

DELONG: Politically, what are the challenges because you’re not going to have a lot of sympathetic ears up there until it [a terror attack] happens.

RUMSFELD: That’s what I was just going to say. This President’s pretty much a victim of success. We haven’t had an attack in five years. The perception of the threat is so low in this society that it’s not surprising that the behavior pattern reflects a low threat assessment. The same thing’s in Europe, there’s a low threat perception. The correction for that, I suppose, is an attack. And when that happens, then everyone gets energized for another [inaudible] and it’s a shame we don’t have the maturity to recognize the seriousness of the threats…the lethality, the carnage, that can be imposed on our society is so real and so present and so serious that you’d think we’d be able to understand it, but as a society, the longer you get away from 9/11, the less…the less…

Lt.-Col. Doug Delaney, chair of the war studies program at the Royal Military College in Kingston, Ontario, told the Toronto Star in July 2007 that “The key to bolstering Western resolve is another terrorist attack like 9/11 or the London transit bombings of two years ago.”

A d v e r t i s e m e n t

The same sentiment was also explicitly expressed in a 2005 GOP memo, which yearned for new attacks that would “validate” the President’s war on terror and “restore his image as a leader of the American people.”

These statements take on an even greater significance when we consider the fact that the U.S. military-industrial complex and the government has openly planned and even admitted to carrying out terrorist attacks as part of its geopolitical strategy.

Operation Northwoods, a plan signed by the Joint Chiefs of Staff at the Pentagon to to “kill innocent people and commit acts of terrorism in U.S. cities to create public support for a war” made headlines in May 2001 when it was revealed by investigative journalist James Bamford in his book Body of Secrets.

Operation Ajax, a CIA program of false flag terror to crush Iran’s first democratic government in the 1950’s, was responsible for the deaths of around 300 people. The CIA admits to the program on their own website.

Then there’s Operation Gladio, a “decades-long covert campaign of terrorism and deceit directed by the intelligence services of the West — against their own populations” run by NATO in collusion with the CIA, a campaign which included the 1980 bombing of the Bologna train station which killed 85 people.

Given this dark history, it’s no surprise to learn that terror attacks in the modern age are still being directed by the same forces. That’s not to say that there aren’t Islamic fundamentalists who are perfectly willing to commit violence, but every major terror attack we have investigated leads back to the same players.

The consequences of the attacks in Uganda which killed 74 people will doubtless be used to further the integration of Africom, the African arm of the move towards global government under the United States African Command, and the events will also be exploited to pave the way for further U.S. military incursions and occupations of the continent in pursuit of controlling Africa’s rich and untapped natural resources.

As CNN’s Rick Sanchez rightly points out, this week’s tragic terror attacks in Uganda will serve to be immeasurably “helpful” in the pursuit of both of these agendas.